Difference between revisions of "Eternity"

<p> <b> [[Eternity]] </b> —There is no word either in OT [[Hebrew]] or in NT Greek corresponding to the abstract idea of eternity. </p> <p> In &nbsp;Isaiah 57:15 both Authorized Version and Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 have the phrase ‘the high and lofty One <i> that inhabiteth eternity </i> .’ Massoretic Text has שֹׁכןעַר, lit. ‘dwelling for ever’—the thought of the writer being evidently the <i> unchangeableness </i> of God. עַר probably comes nearest of all Hebrew words to express permanence. Originally it was a substantive connected with Assyr. [Note: Assyrian.] <i> adú </i> , meaning ‘time,’ ‘passing time,’ ‘the present.’ But in OT it is used adverbially to express indefinite duration of time generally in the future. Its use is mainly poetical: of God (&nbsp;Isaiah 57:15), His law (&nbsp;Psalms 19:9), His attributes (&nbsp;Psalms 111:3; &nbsp;Psalms 111:10). But it is found also in connexion with things whose existence in Hebrew thought would be limited, <i> e.g. </i> a king’s life (&nbsp;Psalms 21:6, &nbsp;Proverbs 29:14), the lip of truth (&nbsp;Proverbs 12:19). </p> <p> A word of wider meaning and more general application is עוֹלָב, connected with Assyr. [Note: Assyrian.] <i> ullânu </i> , meaning ‘ <i> remote time </i> .’ עוֹלָם is frequently used of the fast-days (&nbsp;Isaiah 63:9; &nbsp;Isaiah 63:11, &nbsp;Micah 5:1; &nbsp;Micah 7:14 etc.), people (&nbsp;Isaiah 44:7, &nbsp;Jeremiah 5:15), hills (&nbsp;Genesis 49:26, &nbsp;Habakkuk 3:6). It is also used, like עַר, of God or His attributes as existing from the remote past (&nbsp;Psalms 93:2; &nbsp;Psalms 119:52, &nbsp;Isaiah 63:16; &nbsp;Isaiah 63:19) to the remote future (&nbsp;Psalms 138:8, &nbsp;Jeremiah 31:3, &nbsp;1 Kings 10:9), specially in the phrase מֵהָעוֹלָםוְעַרהָעוֹלִם ‘from everlasting to everlasting’ (&nbsp;Psalms 90:2; &nbsp;Psalms 103:17, &nbsp;Nehemiah 9:5 etc.). But in the case of עוֹלָם also there are many places in OT where its meaning is obviously limited to the affairs and lives of human beings, <i> e.g. </i> of a slave (&nbsp;Deuteronomy 15:7, &nbsp;1 Samuel 27:12), of careless dwellers (&nbsp;Psalms 73:12), and in the familiar phrase, ‘May the king live for ever’ (&nbsp;1 Kings 1:31, &nbsp;Nehemiah 2:3). Often, however, the word is used to indicate the writer’s hope or belief that a certain state of good [ <i> e.g. </i> God’s covenant (&nbsp;Genesis 9:16), or His promises (&nbsp;Isaiah 40:8), or His relations to His people (&nbsp;Psalms 45:17; &nbsp;Psalms 85:8, etc.)], may continue indefinitely. [[Particularly]] is this true of the Messianic hope (&nbsp;Isaiah 9:6, &nbsp;Psalms 110:4; &nbsp;Psalms 45:3). Sometimes this thought of permanence is emphasized by the use of the plural (&nbsp;Isaiah 26:4; &nbsp;Isaiah 45:17, &nbsp;Daniel 9:24). In &nbsp;Ecclesiastes 3:11, a very difficult passage, (Revised Version margin) gives as an alternative rendering of הָעֹלָם ‘ <i> eternity </i> .’ </p> <p> The other Hebrew phrases worthy of note are נ֪צַח ‘perpetuity’ in the frequent phrase לִנָצַח ‘for ever’ (&nbsp;Isaiah 13:20; &nbsp;Isaiah 25:8, &nbsp;Amos 8:7, &nbsp;Habakkuk 1:4 etc.), and אֹרְךְיָמִים ‘length of days,’ &nbsp;Deuteronomy 30:20, &nbsp;Job 12:12, &nbsp;Psalms 21:4, and in the well-known passage &nbsp;Psalms 23:6 ‘I shall dwell in the house of the Lord ever.’ Here the meaning is disputed, but the probability is that the highest anticipation of the [[Psalmist]] was to have the joy of spending an indefinite period in the [[Temple]] in prayer and meditation. [[Similar]] to לְעוֹלָם is the phrase לִרֹרוַרֹך, lit. ‘to age and age,’ .e. to future ages (&nbsp;Exodus 3:15, &nbsp;Psalms 10:6; &nbsp;Psalms 33:11; &nbsp;Psalms 49:11). It is mainly poetical. </p> <p> The idea of eternity, like the idea of immortality, was probably beyond the range of early [[Jewish]] thought. It arose after the Exile, partly through a natural development of the Hebrew conception of God, and partly through the force of circumstances. (1) The pious Jew, turning away more and more from the anthropomorphism of cruder religions, strove to differentiate the infinite God from finite man. God is transcendent—above the limitations of earthly existence. Hence He is eternal, from everlasting to everlasting. A thousand years in His sight are but as yesterday. (2) With the [[Exile]] came a decay of <i> national </i> ideals, and the Jew began to consider more his own personality and its relation to this eternal God. This thought developed slowly, and was mixed with various elements. The Jew found himself in an evil world. His own nation was oppressed, almost blotted out. Good men suffered; wicked men seemed to prosper. If the eternal, omnipotent God ruled the world, then all this must surely end. The Day of the Lord would come for oppressed Israel, for the oppressors, for the whole world, and (in [[Apocalyptic]] literature, Ps-Sol 3:16, 13:9 etc.) for the Jew himself. Then the present evil world (עוֹלִםהַוְּה) would give place to a new and glorious era (עוֹלִםהַכָּא, see Generation). Whether this עוֹלָםהַכָּא would be <i> endless </i> the Jew did not at first stop to inquire. [[Sufficient]] for him that it <i> would </i> come with countless blessings in ‘the end of the days’ (קץהִיָמִים, cf. &nbsp;Matthew 13:39; &nbsp;Matthew 24:3). In the Book of Enoch, however, ‘Time’ is followed by ‘Eternity’ in the עוֹלָםהַכָא. Later [[Judaism]] developed the idea, probably borrowed from the [[Zend]] religion, of a series of world epochs (cf. the world empires of Daniel’s vision), followed by the Messianic age. </p> <p> In the time of Christ, Jewish thought on the future had developed very much, and had assumed many forms (see Eschatology). Jesus must have sifted the various elements. He retained and perhaps developed the view of a new age (עוֹלָםחַפָא) about to dawn on the world as opposed to the present (עוֹלָםהַוָּה; &nbsp;Matthew 12:32, cf. &nbsp;Matthew 13:39; &nbsp;Matthew 28:20). ‘the kingdom of heaven’ (מַלְכוּחשָׁמַיִם) would be established. Jesus endeavoured to concentrate the thoughts of His hearers on their relation to this kingdom, and the desirability of sharing it (see Life, [[Eternal]] Life). [[Doubtless]] this kingdom would be for ever and its members live for ever (cf. &nbsp;Daniel 12:2 חַזֵיעוֹלָם ‘eternal life’). The vexed question of the absolute endlessness of this kingdom, with its rewards and punishments, would probably never be raised in the minds of Jesus’ hearers. At the same time, there is no evidence in the teaching of Jesus of any limit to the עוֹלָםהַבָּא, and while the frequent adjective αἰώνιος, ‘eternal,’ must be taken in the [[Gospels]] as referring in the first place to this coming kingdom, it may, so far as we know, be taken as implying also that quality of absolute permanence with which that kingdom has always been associated in the minds of men. </p> <p> Literature.—The subject is practically part of the larger topic Eschatology, and all books dealing with this latter subject refer more or less to Eternity. On the OT and Apocalyptic views see Stade, <i> Dic Alttest. Vorstellungen vom Zustand nach dem Tode </i> ; Schwally, <i> Das Leben nach dem Tode </i> ; Schultz, <i> OT [[Theology]] </i> , vol. ii. pp. 364–398; Salmond, <i> The [[Christian]] [[Doctrine]] of [[Immortality]] </i> ; Orelli, <i> Die hebr. Synonyma der Zeit und Ewigkeit </i> ; Marti, <i> Geschichte der Israel. [[Religion]] </i> , pp. 270–310. On the NT see the various NT theologies, especially those of Beyschlag and H. Holtzmann. Ct. also Samuel Davidson, <i> Doctrine of the Last Things </i> ; Toy, <i> Judaism and [[Christianity]] </i> ; A. Beet, <i> Last Things </i> 2 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred] ; Dalman, <i> The Words of Jesus </i> . </p> <p> G. Gordon Stott. </p>

<p> ''''' ē̇ ''''' - ''''' tûr´ni ''''' - ''''' ti ''''' ( עולם , <i> ''''' ‛ōlām ''''' </i> ; Greek equivalent, αἰών , <i> ''''' aiō̇n ''''' </i> ): </p> <p> 1. Contrast with Time </p> <p> 2. In the Old [[Testament]] </p> <p> 3. In the New Testament </p> <p> 4. The Eternal "Now" </p> <p> 5. [[Defect]] of This View </p> <p> 6. Philosophical Views </p> <p> 7. Time Conceptions Inadequate </p> <p> 8. All Succession [[Present]] in One Act to Divine [[Consciousness]] </p> <p> 9. Yet Connection Between Eternity and Time </p> <p> 10. The [[Religious]] [[Attitude]] to Eternity </p> <p> Literature </p> 1. Contrast with Time <p> Eternity is best conceived, not in the merely negative form of the non-temporal, or immeasurable time, but positively, as the mode of the timeless self-existence of the Absolute [[Ground]] of the universe. The flux of time grows first intelligible to us, only when we take in the thought of God as eternal - exalted above time. Timeless existence - being or entity without change - is what we here mean by eternity, and not mere everlastingness or permanence through time. God, in His internal being, is raised above time; in His eternal absoluteness, He is throned above temporal development, and knows, as the Scriptures say, no changeableness. The conception of eternity, as without beginning or ending, leaves us with but a negation badly in need of filling out with reality. Eternity is not a mere negative idea; to make of eternity merely a blank and irrelevant negation of temporality would not satisfy any proper theory of being; it functions as the positive relation to time of that eternal God, who is King of all the eons. </p> 2. In the Old Testament <p> In the Old Testament, God's eternity is only negatively expressed, as implying merely indefinitely extended time (&nbsp;Genesis 21:33; &nbsp;Deuteronomy 33:27 ), though &nbsp;Isaiah 40:28 takes more absolute form. [[Better]] is the view of eternity, objectively considered, as a mode of being of God in relation to Himself. For He was eternal, while as yet the world and time were not. But even in the New Testament, the negative form of expression prevails. </p> 3. In the New Testament <p> Time, with its succession of events, helps to fill out such idea as we can form of the eternal, conceived as an endless progress. But, as finite beings, we can form no positive idea of eternity. Time is less contradictory of eternity, than helpful in revealing what we know of it. Plato, in his <i> [[Timaeus]] </i> , says that time is the "moving image of eternity," and we may allow that it is its type or revelation. Not as the annulment of time, though it might be held to be in itself exclusive of time, is eternity to be taken, but rather as the ground of its reality. </p> 4. The Eternal "Now" <p> Eternity might, no doubt, be taken as just time no longer measured by the succession of events, as in the finite universe. But, on a strict view, there is something absurd in an eternity that includes time, and an eternity apart from time is a vain and impossible conception. Eternity, as a discharge from all time limits, is purely negative, though not without importance. Eternity, absolutely taken, must be pronounced incommensurable with time; as Aquinas said, <i> non sunt mensurae unius generis </i> . Eternity, that is to say, would lose its character as eternal in the very entering into relations with the changeful or becoming. Eternity, as in God, has, since the time of [[Augustine]] and the Middle Ages, been frequently conceived as an eternal Now. The [[Schoolmen]] were wont to adopt as a maxim that "in eternity is one only instant always present and persistent." This is but a way of describing eternity in a manner characteristic of succession in time; but eternal Deity, rather than an eternal Now, is a conception far more full of meaning for us. </p> 5. Defect of This View <p> To speak of God's eternity as an eternal Now - a present in the time-sense - involves a contradiction. For the eternal existence is no more described by the notion of a present than by a past or a future. Such a Now or present presupposes a not-now, and raises afresh the old time-troubles, in relation to eternity. Time is certainly not the form of God's life, His eternity meaning freedom from time. Hence, it was extremely troublesome to theology of the Middle Ages to have a God who was not in time at all, supposed to create the world at a particular moment in time. </p> 6. Philosophical Views <p> Spinoza, in later times, made the eternity of God consist in His infinite - which, to Spinoza, meant His necessary - existence. For contingent or durational existence would not, in Spinoza's view, be eternal, though it lasted always. The illusoriness or unreality of time, in respect of man's spiritual life, is not always very firmly grasped. This wavering or uncertain hold of the illusiveness of time, or of higher reality as timeless, is still very prevalent; even so strong-souled a poet as Browning projects the shadow of time into eternity, with rarely a definite conception of the higher life as an eternal and timeless essence; and although Kant, Hegel and Schopenhauer may have held to such a timeless view, it has by no means become a generally adopted doctrine so far, either of theologians or of philosophers. If time be so taken as unreal, then eternity must not be thought of as future, as is done by Dr. Ellis McTaggart and some other metaphysicians today. For nothing could, in that case, be properly future, and eternity could not be said to begin, as is often done in everyday life. </p> <p> The importance of the eternity conception is seen in the fact that neo-Kantian and neo-Hegelian thinkers alike have shown a general tendency to regard time-conceptions as unfit, in metaphysics, for the ultimate explanation of the universe. </p> 7. Time-Conceptions Inadequate <p> Eternity, one may surely hold, must span or include, for God's eternal consciousness, the whole of what happens in time, with all of past, present or future, that lies within the temporal succession. But we are by no means entitled to say, as does Royce, that such wholeness or totality of the temporal constitutes the eternal, for the eternal belongs to quite another order, that, namely, of timeless reality. Eternity is not to be defined in terms of time at all. For God is to us the supra-temporal <i> ens perfectissimum </i> , but One whose timeless self-sufficiency and impassable aloofness are not such as to keep Him from being strength and helper of our temporal striving. Our metaphysical convictions must not here be of barren and unfruitful sort for ethical results and purposes. </p> 8. All Succession Present in One Act to Divine Consciousness <p> Eternity is, in our view, the form of an eternal existence, to which, in the unity of a single insight, the infinite series of varying aspects or processes are, together-wise, as a <i> totum simul </i> , present. But this, as we have already shown, does not imply that the eternal order is nowise different, essentially, from the temporal; time is not to be treated as a segment of eternity, nor eternity regarded as interminable duration; the eternal cannot pass over into the temporal; for, an eternal Being, who should think all things as present, and yet view the time-series as a succession, must be a rather self-contradictory conception. For the Absolute Consciousness, time does not exist; the future cannot, for it, be thought of as beginning to be, nor the past as having ceased to be. </p> 9. Yet Connection Between Eternity and Time <p> After all that has been said, however, eternity and time are not to be thought of as without connection. For the temporal presupposes the eternal, which is, in fact, its positive ground and its perpetual possibility. These things are so, if only for the reason that the Divine mode of existence does not contradict or exclude the human mode of existence. The continuity of the latter - of the temporal - has its guaranty in the eternal. The unconditioned eternity of God brings into harmony with itself the limitations and conditions of the temporal. For time is purely relative, which eternity is not. No distinctions of before and after are admissible in the eternity conception, hence, we have no right to speak of time as a portion of eternity. Thus, while we maintain the essential difference between eternity and time, we at the same time affirm what may perhaps be called the affinity between them. The metaphysics of eternity and its time-relations continue to be matter of proverbial difficulty, and both orders - the eternal and the temporal - had better be treated as concrete, and not left merely to abstract reflection. Our idea of the eternal will best be developed, in this concrete fashion, by the growth of our God-idea, as we more completely apprehend God, as actualized for us in His incarnate Son. </p> 10. The Religious Attitude to Eternity <p> Thus, then, it is eternity, not as immeasurable time, but rather as a mode of being of the immutable God, who is yet progressively revealing Himself in time, which we have here set forth. This is not to say that the religious consciousness has not its own need of the conception of God as being "from everlasting to everlasting," as in &nbsp;Psalm 90:2 , and of His kingdom as "an everlasting kingdom" (&nbsp;Daniel 4:3 ). Nor is it to make us suppose that the absolute and self-existent God, who so transcends all time-dependence, is thereby removed far from us, while, on the contrary, His very greatness makes Him the more able to draw near unto us, in all the plenitude of His being. Hence, it is so truly spoken in &nbsp;Isaiah 57:15 , "Thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy: I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite." Hence, also the profound truthfulness of sayings like that in &nbsp;Acts 17:27 , &nbsp;Acts 17:28 , "He is not far from each one of us: for in him we live, and move, and have our being." After all that has been said, our best knowledge of eternity, as it exists in God, is not developed in any metaphysical fashion, but after the positive and timeless modes of the spiritual life - the modes of trust and love. </p> Literature <p> H. Cremer, <i> Lexicon of New Testament Greek </i> , English edition, 1880; G. B. Winer, <i> Grammar of New Testament Greek </i> , 3rd edition, 1882; R. C. French, <i> Synonyms of the New Testament </i> , 9th edition, 1880; E. H. Plumptre, <i> The Spirits in [[Prison]] </i> , 3rd edition, 1885; J. Orr, <i> Christian View of God and the World </i> , lst edition, 1893; I. A. Dorner, <i> System of Christian Doctrine </i> , English edition, 1885; J. H. Stirling, <i> [[Philosophy]] and Theology </i> , 1890; J. Lindsay, <i> Studies in European Philosophy </i> , 1909; <i> The Fundamental Problems of [[Metaphysics]] </i> , 1910. </p>